We remark that as we generalize [1]}, our proof follows a similar structure. In particular, Lemma 1 is a generalization of (10) in [1]}, and our Lemma 2 combines Lemmas 2 and 3 from [1]}. Lemmas 3, 4, and 6 in our work parallel Lemmas 5, 4, and 6 from [1]}, respectively. Lemma 5 in our work deals with the maximization problem w.r.t. \(\lambda \) , so there is no analogue in [1]}. However, it borrows techniques from Theorem 1 in [6]}.
